American Exceptionalism

The Dissimulation and Rank Hypocrisy of American Exceptionalism

To be filed in the U.S. Archives of the "Pot-kettle-black/do as I say, not as I do/cognitive dissonance/talking out both sides of the mouth" Hall of Fame:

Seems the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Protests in China have sparked all sorts of hypocritical chastisement and moral hand-wringing from our elected saints and angels. Me thinks we doth project too much.

First, this portion of a statement issued by the office of the Secretary of State on June 3rd:

A China that has made enormous progress economically, and that is emerging to take its rightful place in global leadership, should examine openly the darker events of its past and provide a public accounting of those killed, detained or missing, both to learn and to heal.

This anniversary provides an opportunity for Chinese authorities to release from prison all those still serving sentences in connection with the events surrounding June 4, 1989. We urge China to cease the harassment of participants in the demonstrations and begin dialogue with the family members of victims, including the Tiananmen Mothers. China can honor the memory of that day by moving to give the rule of law, protection of internationally-recognized human rights, and democratic development the same priority as it has given to economic reform.

                                                                                           -Hillary Rodham Clinton

Guess she didn't get her boss' memo on U.S. human rights abuses:

"I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards. And part of my job is to make sure that for example at the CIA, you've got extraordinarily talented people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don't want them to suddenly feel like they've got to spend all their time looking over their shoulders and lawyering."

"This is not a time for retribution. It's a time for reflection. It's not a time to use our energy and our time in looking back and in a sense of anger and retribution."

                                                                                -President Barak Obama

Then, a resolution in the House (H.R. 489) which passed 396-1 on June 3rd included this inconceivably sanctimonious language directed at another nation:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(A) expresses sympathy to the families of those killed, tortured, and imprisoned

(B) calls on the People’s Republic of China to invite full and independent investigations into the Tiananmen Square crackdown, assisted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the International Committee of the Red Cross;

C) calls on the legal authorities of the People’s Republic of China to review immediately the cases of those still imprisoned for participating in the 1989 protests for compliance with internationally recognized standards of fairness and due process in judicial proceedings.

Not be outdone on utter two-facedness, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (who spearheaded the resolution) chimed in to support it:

"I have said that if we don't speak out about our concerns regarding human rights in China and Tibet, then we lose all moral authority to discuss it about any other country in the world."

The lone voice of reason (and dissenting vote) amidst this self-congratulatory din of political/moral proselytizing was that "nutcase" from Texas, Ron Paul. He responded thusly:

As to the substance of the resolution, I find it disturbing that the House is going out of its way to meddle in China’s domestic politics, which is none of our business, while ignoring the many pressing issues in our own country that definitely are our business.

This resolution “calls on the People’s Republic of China to invite full and independent investigations into the Tiananmen Square crackdown, assisted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the International Committee of the Red Cross…” Where do we get the authority for such a demand? I wonder how the US government would respond if China demanded that the United Nations conduct a full and independent investigation into the treatment of detainees at the US-operated Guantanamo facility?

The resolution “calls on the legal authorities of People’s Republic of China to review immediately the cases of those still imprisoned for participating in the 1989 protests for compliance with internationally recognized standards of fairness and due process in judicial proceedings.” In light of US government’s extraordinary renditions of possibly hundreds of individuals into numerous secret prisons abroad where they are held indefinitely without charge or trial, one wonders what the rest of the world makes of such US demands. It is hard to exercise credible moral authority in the world when our motto toward foreign governments seems to be “do as we say, not as we do.”

While we certainly do not condone government suppression of individual rights and liberties wherever they may occur, why are we not investigating these abuses closer to home and within our jurisdiction? It seems the House is not interested in investigating allegations that US government officials and employees approved and practiced torture against detainees. Where is the Congressional investigation of the US-operated “secret prisons” overseas? What about the administration’s assertion of the right to detain individuals indefinitely without trial? It may be easier to point out the abuses and shortcomings of governments overseas than to address government abuses here at home, but we have the constitutional obligation to exercise our oversight authority in such matters. I strongly believe that addressing these current issues would be a better use of our time than once again condemning China for an event that took place some 20 years ago.

Now, if that plain speaking, logical son-of-a-bitch could just fall on the correct side of the abortion issue, who knows, I might be persuaded to vote Republican.

Maybe he'll make it easy for me and switch to Independent before the 2012 election.

How about a Paul/Nader ticket? Any objections?